This is a re-post from another forum. This topic is on many peoples minds and there are those who wish to hide this information and attack anyone that speaks about this theory.

The last months SWIM and his fellow Trippers/Psychonauts-friends have a always returning subject of discussion: Is this blotter real LSD?

Most of SWIM's fellow Trippers have more experience then SWIM with LSD. SWIm experience with LSD is 5 Years, theirs maybe7-8.
The question didnt rised because of bitter tasting blotters, it comes from somewhere else...

This Summer, during Festival season in europe, there were a lot of dalai Lamas (buddhas) and Shivas around. Its supposed to be the same stuff, just the shiva is supposed to be half the dalailamas force. The Dalai Lama was strong, and indeed, good. but 4 hours later, so SWIM says, the effect weared off, and they started to wonder. how can it be, that 4 hours later the strong effect start to wear off?

Now the strange thing is, that the effect of these blotter are like lsd, SWIM would even say it is LSD, the only thing disturbing him is the duration. but compared to trips

This conspiracy theory was heard from a certain group at one of these festival, that had good really good drops of acid. they started this whole discussion, that the last 4-5 years there is a big, world wide lsd conspiracy going on. The people behind production arent the same anymore, it would be too expensive and complicated today to do real acid, so they prefere to combine/not combine, however put RC's on blotter, that allone or in combination with other RC'S, have a very lsd like effect. So people behind production today, wouldnt be interested in spreadin lsd in the world, but in the 10 euro for ur blotter...ur money. and the real LSD-25, like that one that hoffman once produced, was always underground, and also today will always stay underground.

What are the other SWIMMERS thinking about this? has anySWIMMER tried the dalai lama (buddha) and had simmilar diminishing effect after 4h? Do SWIY think there is a LSD-conpiracy going on, most blotters arent real acid? if it is true, what could it be? what rc would produce more or less the same acid effect, just less time?

It's a conspiracy as far as ALL major drug manufacturing operations are "conspiracies". Ha..

There's been many tests done, "RCs" being sold as LSD is a lot rarer than people make it out to be. Doesn't mean people shouldn't be careful but it's not as common as that post you quoted seems to suggest.

There certainly is still LSD-25 out on the market available around the world. Its about who you know. Its no surprise to see a variance of blotters at festival scenes. Think about, there are thousands of heads trying to make some money, and not everyone of them is an honest truthworthy dealer. People are going to be shady.

Also there have been GC-MS analysis of suspected non-LSD blotters that show a similar erogline structure, but isn't LSD-25. Some of these possible compounds have said to have similar effects to LSD but with a slightly shorter duration.

LSD-25 has a vast range of effects. You can take a dose one weekend and it can be completely different to the same dose the weekend after. That's just LSD. No need to go hunting round for conspiracy theories that everyone is putting RC's on blotter paper.

What "4 hours" is this kid referring to? Is he saying that he dropped the blotter and 4 hours later he was back to baseline? Or is he saying that once they noticed they were up it was 4 hours after that? How accurately was he keeping time? To me, it sounds like some stoned teenager saying to his mate "I'm coming down now are you?" and his mate saying "Yeah" and they call convinced themselves together. I wouldn't take it seriously.

So far as blotter that's not really LSD, yes set and setting IS obviously a large factor, however, in reply to the absolutism being expressed by some, there is ample evidence that there ARE substances active at blotter doses that are NOT LSD, being sold as LSD on blotters, despite folks above telling you its all in your head.

Thanks to SKL on esotericpharma.org... below is a direct copy of a few of his posts there, as well as the above journal article full PDFs... I asked him to repost it in one of the "fake acid?" threads here but he hasnt yet, so I'll spare him the trouble, since I am so tired of hearing the fact-free "all blotter is necessarily real LSD and any incorrect effects are all in your head" bullshit some people are obsessed with repeating over and over for reasons I won't attempt to psychoanalytically speculate about

- DH

Non-LSD ergoloids on blotter sold as "LSD" (GC/MS included)

Attached is a GC/MS that was done on a well-circulated blotter of European origin, a design that you would have heard of.

I and many others sampled the blotters, and felt the same way ... and this has been commented on by various people over the years ... it felt almost, but not quite like LSD (this is why the GC/MS was obtained), but was definitely not a DO-drug, 5-MeO-AMT, or any else of the various "other" things that has wound up on bunk blots.

The astute organic chemists among us will note that this is not LSD (note-a professional chemist I am not, but I have all of this on good authority). The GC/MS is not very easy to read because it came of paper which causes significant artifacts, but that much is clear.

Re: This is not LSD.
What is it, then?

I passed it to a chemist friend of mine who would prefer to remain anonymous, and he suggests one of the following:

Re: This is not LSD.
To dredge up some posts on Bluelight by me on this matter from earlier this year:

Quote:
If you are making something without a diethylamide in it, you don't need to be fucked to get diethylamine. I won't go further into synth-discussion territory because it's something that's relevant to probably on a handful of people on the face of the earth -- a fraternity that I am nowhere close to being a member of, but I did run across some very interesting GC/MS data recently this year

Quote:
I would add that some of these analogues are not necessarily "bad", in fact, in some ways, they may be subjectively a better experience -- in my subjective experience and the reports of some others, they are quicker and shorter acting and less anxiogenic/psychotomimetic, which may have to do with a greater affinity for 5ht1a.

Quote:
To a casual user, something like lysergic acid morpholide, or N-(3-pentyl)- or N-(sec-butyl)-lysergamide, all of which have circulated, would likely be very difficult to distinguish from LSD, but nonetheless would result in a qualitatively different experience; this could account for some of the varying "qualities" of LSD which circulates. Also, I strongly suspect that unreacted precusors and reagents, even in the miniscule relevant quantities, might have some psychophysiological effect.

RE: Non-LSD ergoloids on blotter sold as "LSD" (GC/MS includ

The 'other' ergoloid, which I will call "LS?", is, broadly speaking, in my limited subjective experience:

Re: Non-LSD ergoloids on blotter sold as "LSD" (GC/MS includ
Spark wrote:
Interesting. The question is, why would they sell these things instead of the real deal? Cheaper to make? Easier to make? A mistake in the synthesis (unlikely)?

It is quieter to make. Less watched precursors.

Quote:
Perhaps this is an explanation for the differences in "quality" that people speak of in terms of LSD. At least in some cases, I'd imagine. Honestly, one compound (and since the enantiomer thread makes it clear it is ONLY one compound) can't be that dammed different on a regular basis...

I think MOST of the difference has to do with subjective factors, but this is a factor.

I think that small impurities in various steps of the synth may also influence the final product in untoward ways. In a conversation I had with Dr. Nichols he suggested impure diethylamine resulting in the production of unknown lysergamides that might have effects in microdoses, but that is basically speculation. He definitely agreed that it is not al subjective though.

Quote:
What honestly always worries me more is that instead of LSD, they'll sell DOX as LSD.

This was a popular practice for a while during the overlap of the post-Pickard drought and the beginning of the modern RC scene, but now is a little less common, except in really backwater markets. DOB was the big offender in those days.

DOC blotters definitely circulate though. I got a page of DOC blotters with the Alex Gray Hofmann painting on it once, and that pissed me off :roll: . But I knew what I asked for and I knew what I got.

SOMEONE ELSE:

Re: Non-LSD ergoloids on blotter sold as "LSD" (GC/MS includ
I posted this in the thread SLK mention in the OP.
"I recently came across a supplier of acid whose acid, though very high quality, seems to be slightly different in effects from all of my previous LSD experiences and vastly different my DOx blotter experiences. The supposed LSD produced visuals at a very low level of intensity (which is far from all my previous experiences with LSD). It was also surprising anxiolytic at high doses where CEV's were constant and extremely vivid. The head space wasn't as out there as all my other previous experiences as well, even after consuming 4 hits (the visuals were absolutely insane). There are reports from multiple who also consumed this blotter that it was very visual, even with one hit. It felt like an ergoline, but it just felt different from LSD."

I wish I still had some the blotter and the money to get it tested.

A different batch of LSD was sold from my dealer which from another individual who has taken the above blotters and then consumed some of the new batch had a different qualitative experience, than the batch of blotters that were in town literally a week before. Now I never got a chance to consume these blotters, but it was reported that they were way less visual and had a stronger head high/analytical mind fuck if you will, with roughly the same dosage in terms of intensity and number of blotters consumed.

In case people are wondering, I'm in the US on the east coast. The suspect blotters where of varying prints which were all perforated (i personally saw a star patterned, pop art john lennon, and some dahli esque eye art). The next batch of blotter was just standard white on white unperforated.

SKL AGAIN:

The blotter in the OP was the cartoon hofmann/ohm blotter.

Re: Non-LSD ergoloids on blotter sold as "LSD" (GC/MS included)
Topic rearing its head on BL again

Important thing here, is that there are multiple Things being talked about in this thread:

1. high vs, low quality LSD - there is a lot of anecdotal evidence for this but not a lot of genuine chemical knowledge about how this could be so. The inscribe enantiomers of LSD are almost certainly NOT responsible; but it is not entirely impossible that other compounds, products of impure reagents or botched syntheses, might have untoward physiological effects. No less an authority than Dr. Nichols (pers. comm., 2008 ) has speculated as much.

2. Non-LSD ergoloids - this is confirmed but nobody knows very much about the subject and those that do aren't talking. To me it is a major scandal. But the thing is, these are actually pretty cool drugs, it is highly unlikely that they are causing any higher proportion of "bad" experiences than legit LSD.

3. Non-ergoloid psychedelics. This is just a dick move mostly by stupid kids to custie people. It was popular during the post-Pickard drought, a time during which #2 was unheard of ... But now is a little less common except in truly backwater markets, largely, I believe, due to the proliferation of #2.

4. Set and setting. Probably the biggest factor, more than people would like to admit, in the subjective differences betwixt different trips.

well I spent a half hour writing this but then dwayne comes and blows me out of the water with evidence

anyways

To answer your question, no I dont think their is a giant world wide lsd conspiracy, but yes I have heard the same rumors, and I have also seen some very compelling information by people I am inclined to believe on this board (moderators included) who think there are still quite a few RC blotters making the rounds, while other equally respected members are saying the RC blotters were mainly big after the early 2000's bust...

There are quite a few threads out there vaguely mentioning this (and a really good one that is probably within the last 20 pages of threads that I just can not find atm) and since I'm none to good at the search function, ill just mention what I remember.

Theory 1 (and what I am probably believe this is the biggest part) -- It all has to do with dose and subjective user experiences.
A lot of people think the wide array of doses on blotter is what is causing all the discrepancies out there. Well its definitely not the sole cause but I think this would play as big of a roll as anything, along with the fact that psychedelics are among the most versatile drugs known to man and can illicit a wide arrange of effects from person to person.

Theory 2 -- DOx's are going around on blotter
Some people think bitter tasting blotters, blotters that take an hour or more just to be felt, and/or blotters that last substantially longer then 10-14 hours are DOx chemicals being sold on blotter. They point to the low doses of DOx (so they can fit on blotter) as another primary piece of evidence. The general consensus for a while was that DOx's were the only possible culprits because of their low doses, although in recent years other psychedelics including the dragonfly series, nbome series, and lsd derivatives have come to light that also require microgram dosing. Also the general consensus was that blotters could only fit 1-10 mg at most, however this also appears not to be case. And for a lot of years the occasional bitter taste of blotter was suppose to indicate presence of DOx, but this too is incorrect. i had some Albert Hoffmans and Alex Greys last month that were vary bitter but definitely very potent lsd.

Theory 3: LSD derivatives (ald-52, al-lad, eth-lad, pro-lad, and others) are being sold on blotter because they are either easy to produce or easier to obtain because of legal status.
This has been suggested by some to explain the blotters that feel quite a bit or even identical to lsd with either shorter or longer durations then lsd. There has also been the suggestion that they are so close to lsd, structurally, they will cause a false positive for lsd, so even blotters that have been tested to hold lsd may have actually held a derivative. now I dont necessarily believe this theory for several reasons. I am under the impression that these chemicals have never been sold commercially by traditional RC dealers, partially because because the synthesis of these chemicals are just as hard if not harder then traditional lsd, and require the same illegal precursor chemicals, so if they were to be made they would be made by the traditional LSD manufactures (chemists at underground labs). So the question arises why would they not just make lsd? But this is also definitely happenign in some cases! So whats going on here?

Theory 4 (the theory you mentioned) -- A wide arrange of lsd like chemicals and various RC's are being sold on blotters, and the only real lsd being passed around today is rare and "underground".
Once again I dont believe this theory for the reason I mentioned for the last two, or for the reason I dont believe any conspiracy theory. Typically such theories are just inadequate explanations to a challenging question, that are then passed as fact to people who will believe it. I am not saying fake lsd isnt sold everyday, in fact its the exact opposite. However this is probably done by local and small scale cunts, and you know what if they sold there product as what it is, they wouldnt be cunts, theyd be heroes of mine, but instead we got lying cunts ripping people off. And if there is anybody out there who really knows what their talking about please come forward! Until then we'll just be left guessing..

Wouldn't non-scheduled varients of DOx be the way to go in terms of profit, ease of synthesis, and way lower probability of staying out of jail (precursor chemicals would be legal, and so would final product.)?

In comparison LSD (and related ergolines) requires chemicals that are both illegal and watched by law enforcement agencies. The synthesis is, by my understanding, much harder than DOx. Getting caught making LSD pretty much seals the deal you'll get some sort of prison sentence.

It seems the probability that DOx is on most blotters nowadays is rediculously high.

Wouldn't non-scheduled varients of DOx be the way to go in terms of profit, ease of synthesis, and way lower probability of staying out of jail (precursor chemicals would be legal, and so would final product.)?

In comparison LSD (and related ergolines) requires chemicals that are both illegal and watched by law enforcement agencies. The synthesis is, by my understanding, much harder than DOx. Getting caught making LSD pretty much seals the deal you'll get some sort of prison sentence.

It seems the probability that DOx is on most blotters nowadays is rediculously high.

This does indeed make a lot of intuitive sense, but it doesn't actually reflect reality. The prevalence of DO-drugs on blotters was higher a few years ago during the initial post-Pickard drought; now, it is less common to find DO-blotters on the retail market, except on a relatively small scale in backwater markets, or with one ethically challenged individually buying or making and reselling such blotters deceptively. Now, the presence of LS?-drugs is considerably higher, and the ways in which they are distributed seem to indicate that the deceptive distribution is happening on a higher level than in the case of counterfeit DO-blotters (in the terms of the OP, this might indeed be termed a "conspiracy.")

The reason that the LS?-drugs are made over LSD is that due to differences in their syntheses, they can be made in a quieter manner without attracting the attention of law enforcement; additionally, not all jurisdictions' laws are similar to the U.S., it is in some, it might be legal, or tolerated, to make chemicals which are not specifically illegal ...

But all of this is hypothesizing. All we have is two facts which are indisputably true:

(a) Popular blotters have been found which have something on them which is very similar chemically to LSD, but not, in fact, LSD. Of course only a very few blotters have been tested, so we have no idea of the prevalence of the "LS?" in the market, but it stands to reason, especially in light of (b), infra, that their market share is considerable if they were found in an assay of a random blotter which is prevalent in the market and that some unknown individuals took the time and effort to synthesize this compound, put it on blotters, and distribute it.

(b) For a number of years a number of individuals have reported experiences with blotters which, subjectively speaking, are a great deal like LSD, but are not LSD, and have a variety of small, but significant differences, but do not whatsoever fit the profile of the effects of the ring-substituted psychedelic amphetamines, the furans, or anything else that is known to fit in blotters.

It is most likely that (a) is the culprit in the cases of (b) that have arisen over time. Additionally, given that it is very likely that many people, especially but not exclusively those who are relatively inexperienced with LSD and psychedelic states in general, would be entirely unable to differentiate subjectively between LSD and "LS?", that the number of "LS?" experiences that are being had that go unreported is huge.

The true market share of "LS?" over "LSD" is unknowable, but my personal contention would be that it is relatively high. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is higher in mass marketed perforated art blotters of common design of European origin.

Wouldn't non-scheduled varients of DOx be the way to go in terms of profit, ease of synthesis, and way lower probability of staying out of jail (precursor chemicals would be legal, and so would final product.)?

In comparison LSD (and related ergolines) requires chemicals that are both illegal and watched by law enforcement agencies. The synthesis is, by my understanding, much harder than DOx. Getting caught making LSD pretty much seals the deal you'll get some sort of prison sentence.

It seems the probability that DOx is on most blotters nowadays is rediculously high.

This does indeed make a lot of intuitive sense, but it doesn't actually reflect reality. The prevalence of DO-drugs on blotters was higher a few years ago during the initial post-Pickard drought; now, it is less common to find DO-blotters on the retail market, except on a relatively small scale in backwater markets, or with one ethically challenged individually buying or making and reselling such blotters deceptively. Now, the presence of LS?-drugs is considerably higher, and the ways in which they are distributed seem to indicate that the deceptive distribution is happening on a higher level than in the case of counterfeit DO-blotters (in the terms of the OP, this might indeed be termed a "conspiracy.")

The reason that the LS?-drugs are made over LSD is that due to differences in their syntheses, they can be made in a quieter manner without attracting the attention of law enforcement; additionally, not all jurisdictions' laws are similar to the U.S., it is in some, it might be legal, or tolerated, to make chemicals which are not specifically illegal ...

But all of this is hypothesizing. All we have is two facts which are indisputably true:

(a) Popular blotters have been found which have something on them which is very similar chemically to LSD, but not, in fact, LSD. Of course only a very few blotters have been tested, so we have no idea of the prevalence of the "LS?" in the market, but it stands to reason, especially in light of (b), infra, that their market share is considerable if they were found in an assay of a random blotter which is prevalent in the market and that some unknown individuals took the time and effort to synthesize this compound, put it on blotters, and distribute it.

(b) For a number of years a number of individuals have reported experiences with blotters which, subjectively speaking, are a great deal like LSD, but are not LSD, and have a variety of small, but significant differences, but do not whatsoever fit the profile of the effects of the ring-substituted psychedelic amphetamines, the furans, or anything else that is known to fit in blotters.

It is most likely that (a) is the culprit in the cases of (b) that have arisen over time. Additionally, given that it is very likely that many people, especially but not exclusively those who are relatively inexperienced with LSD and psychedelic states in general, would be entirely unable to differentiate subjectively between LSD and "LS?", that the number of "LS?" experiences that are being had that go unreported is huge.

The true market share of "LS?" over "LSD" is unknowable, but my personal contention would be that it is relatively high. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is higher in mass marketed perforated art blotters of common design of European origin.

There is definitely real LSD circulating, also there is definitely "LS?" circulating. The proportion of which over which predominates, there is no real way of knowing. My semi-educated guess would be that genuine diethyl amide is more common than the other stuff.

However, it is worth noting again: the "LS?" is not that bad a drug; in some ways, and to some people, it seems to be preferred over the real thing.

There is definitely real LSD circulating, also there is definitely "LS?" circulating. The proportion of which over which predominates, there is no real way of knowing. My semi-educated guess would be that genuine diethyl amide is more common than the other stuff.

However, it is worth noting again: the "LS?" is not that bad a drug; in some ways, and to some people, it seems to be preferred over the real thing.

I wonder if there's a connection between LSD-analogs and the seemingly broad variation in the duration of effects (e.g - 8-12hrs)...

Personally, all my trips have been 12hrs. Tho they have all come from the same lab, which is all i can be sure of.. As for methods of synth, maybe that affects duration..

Wouldn't non-scheduled varients of DOx be the way to go in terms of profit, ease of synthesis, and way lower probability of staying out of jail (precursor chemicals would be legal, and so would final product.)?

In comparison LSD (and related ergolines) requires chemicals that are both illegal and watched by law enforcement agencies. The synthesis is, by my understanding, much harder than DOx. Getting caught making LSD pretty much seals the deal you'll get some sort of prison sentence.

It seems the probability that DOx is on most blotters nowadays is rediculously high.

You would think so - and there's certainly a fair amount of it going around, particularly in dodgier circles, and my friends have gotten DOx blotter. But, it's really easy to tell LSD and a DOx apart, just through duration. Plus, people don't want DOx, and know they don't want it. Dealers selling it lose customers.

I almost wonder if the above discussed "short acting, really visual, less anxiogenic, less deep" psychedelic sold as LSD was chosen for exactly those properties - a case of a producer choosing an alternative equally hard to make as LSD, but which they think will be preferred over LSD by the end user - those are some of the main complaints about LSD: "it's too long" "I wanted stronger visuals" "I got freaked out by such and such" - and this product sold as lsd addresses all of those...

Also, diethylamine is sketchy, it doesn't have many uses, and is watched carefully. Other amines might be more readily available. Sure, you still need the lysergic acid, but why use two watched precursors when you could just use one?

This makes a lot of sense. Although I'm sure there's some, a wholesale replacement of LSD with DOx across the board just didn't seem plausible. But I can totally see some other ergoloid gaining market share because of easier synthesis, lower LE profile, lower cost, etc. This has been nagging me for a while, thanks so much for (mostly) tying up a loose end. This is the kind of thread where BL really shines.

If its so damned hard to make real LSD-25, to where only a handful of people can make it without being watched/locked up, then why is it hard to believe that people will sell passable substitutes whatever they are? especially when as much LSD goes around as it does, festivals all over the world, people everywhere have LSD...

so I propose that either
a. someone is wrong about only a handful of people being able to make it
b. its something different and people have accepted its affects and consider that real without even knowing. (which would also explain why so many people thought LSD was different back in the day when it wasn't so watched, vs now, and if this has been going on for a long time would explain why we see so many different opinions about it being good, bad the same etc.) gtg

I have a genuine and powerful interest in what happens in the actual production of LSD, documentaries on the matter make me feel divine and in the realm of the food of the gods.

I claim to know nothing except comparing blotters and believe very little of what I hear on the streets about it. sacred substance! I wish it was abundant and hope it's being handled by another Owsley or Pickard and were all just being loopy and conspiring amongst ourselves. Or some of those fine Japanese chemists with similar interests/passions...

If its so damned hard to make real LSD-25, to where only a handful of people can make it without being watched/locked up, then why is it hard to believe that people will sell passable substitutes whatever they are? especially when as much LSD goes around as it does, festivals all over the world, people everywhere have LSD...

so I propose that either
a. someone is wrong about only a handful of people being able to make it
b. its something different and people have accepted its affects and consider that real without even knowing. (which would also explain why so many people thought LSD was different back in the day when it wasn't so watched, vs now, and if this has been going on for a long time would explain why we see so many different opinions about it being good, bad the same etc.) gtg